Video Encoding Performance

Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled.

Xmpeg + DivX Encode

Windows Media Encoder 9 - Advanced Profile

Graysky's x264 HD test uses x264 to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.

x264 HD Benchmark - 1st Pass

x264 HD Benchmark - 2nd Pass

x264 HD 3.03 Benchmark - 1st Pass

x264 HD 3.03 Benchmark - 2nd Pass

 

SYSMark 2007 & Adobe Photoshop Performance 3D Rendering Performance
POST A COMMENT

79 Comments

View All Comments

  • DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    Part of me hopes BD gets delayed so AMD will release a Phenom II X4 @ 4GHz Reply
  • tipoo - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    ...But why? It would just look good on paper, BD is where their real performance aspirations are. Reply
  • DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    for the sheer novelty of it. Thats all. Reply
  • Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    There is no novelty to these issues. Its business. Buy any AMD X4 965+ and OC to 4Ghz.... thats the Novelty part.

    Having ALL your best products - even those costing almost $300 that is slower than the competitions $200 lower-end CPUs is not fun.

    I have a #2 desktop that is rendering videos daily (converting my OLD VHS) - and I'll need to upgrade its mobo/CPU to speed up the process. A NEW CPU will speed things up at lest 4-6x. (Its an OLD AMD X2).

    The Intel's use less power, there is that odd-ball combination that allows the GPU of the intel be used to help render video faster.

    So yeah, when looking at a $150~200 CPU, its performance that counts - not MHz.

    Still, for most people - any $75~100 CPU will DO just fine. Including gaming.
    Reply
  • GullLars - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - link

    With a $20-30 aftermarket cooler, you can hit 4GHz while undervolting a x50+ Phenom II. I haven't tried Athlon II's, but i'll be upgrading my father's Athlon X2 7550 to an Athlon II x4 645 and donate my old 1066 CL5 DDR2 sticks to it, so i guess i'll try hitting 4GHz on that too just for fun with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus.
    My 1090T runs F@H smoothly at 4GHz with stock volt (Noctua NH-D14 cooler).
    Reply
  • JonnyDough - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - link

    I agree.

    Considering that the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T is only $54 more and beats the new chip in most benchmarks while using less power under load (using max turbo @ 3.7, same clocks as the new 980 BE) I'd say that this new 4 core is a poor value comparatively.
    Reply
  • JumpingJack - Sunday, September 21, 2014 - link

    Hindsight is 20/20, it didn't work out quite as people wanted.... Reply
  • StrangerGuy - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    I'm sure the PhII is already stuck at 3.8GHz at reasonable voltages and has been this way for a long time.

    I wonder how AMD feels when the mobile i7-2820QM is just as fast as their 4.2GHz OCed Phenom II X4. Bulldozer single-threaded performance and power consumption has to be at least the same as Nehalem to stand a fighting chance.
    Reply
  • khimera2000 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    probably the same way Intel feels about AMD's video cards. Reply
  • Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    You ARE kidding, right?!

    You can already OC to 4Ghz. And it will STILL be slower than i5-2400 ($190) which runs at 3.1Ghz.

    Clock Speed doesn't mean then end-all. Remember the says of AMD64 vs P4? Even at 3~4Ghz, the $1000 P4 Extreme Editions were still SLOWER than AMD's 2.0~2.4Ghz $200~300 CPUs.

    The performance wouldn't be so much an issue *IF* that i5-2400 was selling for $400, but its not. Its selling at the same price with a actual performance benefits.

    The i3-2100 (I hate these stupid intel model numbers) = $125 and puts it on par with the AMD-PII 955 ($140) - which is an upper end AMD part... going against an intel bottom end Core X CPU.

    Bulldozer needs to be OUT NOW. AMD makes great products, but they are late to the party.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now